M/S HANUMAN TUBE WELL CO.,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

40b of the Act,) should be disallowed to the extent of Interest on CDR and Interest on Income Tax Refund treating these Interests as Income from other sources in place of Business Receipts and Rejected the concept of Book Profit for the purpose of calculating Remuneration to Partners. The order challenged before Ld. CIT(A) which was dismissed through their

BHAWANI CHEM,JAIPUR vs. ASSESING OFFICER, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

section 251 of Income tax Act, 1961.’’ 3.3 During the course of hearing, the ld. AR prayed that the lower authorities have erred in confirming the addition for which following written submission has been filed by the ld. AR of the assessee. ‘’The main issue in this case relates to disallowance of Rs 469198.00 as interest to partners

SAKET AGARWAL,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(3) JAIPUR, JAIPUR

40B\n06.\nRevised Computation of Income\n41-43\n07.\nCopy of ITR V & Computation of Income\n44-48\n08.\nReply Dt 13-03-21 & 19-03-21 for submission of Passport\n49-92\nS No\nParticulars\nPage No.\n01.\nApplication for condonation of delay in filing of Appeal.\n1\n02.\nWritten Submission\n2-13\n03.\nCircular F No. PR.CCIT/NeAC/SOP/2020-21

INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR vs. GOLDENDUNES HEIGHTS LLP, JAIPUR

Bench: Him.

section 142(1) of the Act dated 13.02.2021 was asked to prove the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of loan transactions. The assessee submitted details and on perusal of the same ld. AO noticed that it has failed to justify the unsecured loan from the following parties. (i) Aventez Media Technology- The assessee has received loan